Saturday, February 26, 2011

The Houston Chronicle quotes a demographer, Steve Murdock, who notes looking at population projections for Texas, "It's basically over for Anglos." The story reports that two out of every three Texas children are non-Anglo (almost all Mexican origin) and that will become even more pronounced in the future. Murdock is a former U.S. Census Bureau Director and is currently the Director of the Hobby Center for the Study of Texas at Rice University. Murdock says that Texas is divided into two: an aging Anglo population and a young, almost entirely Mexican origin population. This sets up the mother of all spoils battles: spend on mostly Mexican kids, or aging Whites. The impact of this spoils battle could conceivably, if it spirals out of control, lead to a break-up of the US along racial lines, at worst. Its been predicted, before, by men who are no fringe figures.

Between 2000 and 2040, the state's public school enrollment will see a 15 percent decline in Anglo children while Hispanic children will make up a 213 percent increase, he said.

The state's largest county - Harris - will shed Anglos throughout the coming decades. By 2040, Harris County will have about 516, 000 fewer Anglos than lived in the Houston area in 2000, while the number of Hispanics will increase by 2.5 million during the same period, Murdock said. The projection assumes a net migration rate equal to one-half of 1990-2000.…B y 2040, only 20 percent of the state's public school enrollment will be Anglo, he said. Last year, non-Hispanic white children made up 33.3 percent of the state's 4.8 million public school enrollment.

Of the state's 254 counties, 79 recorded declining population during the past 20 years. All are rural. An additional 30 Texas counties, he said, would have also lost population had they not experienced Hispanic growth.

The state's future looks bleak assuming the current trend line does not change because education and income levels for Hispanics lag considerably behind Anglos, he said.

Unless the trend line changes, 30 percent of the state's labor force will not have even a high school diploma by 2040, he said. And the average household income will be about $6,500 lower than it was in 2000. That figure is not inflation adjusted so it will be worse than what it sounds.

"It's a terrible situation that you are in. I am worried," Murdock said.

Whites are defacto minorities in California, Arizona, Texas, and Nevada. In California, Hispanics outnumber Whites absolutely, while in Arizona, Texas, and Nevada about two thirds of children under 14 are Hispanic, and only about a third White. If one believes in unicorns, rainbows, and fairies (the Tinkerbell kind, not the San Francisco leather-bound kind) then this will be no problem. "Magic" will sprinkle pixie dust on Hispanic children, magically making them achieve the same educational levels, same low levels of criminal activity, same economic levels, as the White populations they are replacing. And everyone will dance around singing Kumbayah and holding hands in one giant post-racial party, happy to have conquered "Whiteness." This is the fantasy of the Puritan-Progressive elite, and post-Quakers, the cultural heirs to the New England Puritans and Pennsylvania Quakers. Who believe in a mish-mash of "elect and damned" and "be nice to others, they'll be nice to you." The latter sound advice when your neighbors are the Amish, not so sound when they are MS-13 or the Zetas.

The reality is likely to be quite different. First, flight. As noted extensively in "Albion's Seed" by David Hackett Fischer, the response of the British Borderers and their "hillbilly" descendants has been first to flee. Then fight when left with no alternative. Fleeing is easier than fighting, and all cultural groups of White people, the New England Puritans, the Virginian Cavaliers, the Mid Atlantic Quakers, and the Appalachian Backwoodsmen, do their utmost to remove themselves culturally, physically, and socially from non-Whites. No group of White people clamors to live in the Ghetto or Barrio, instead they at best in times of high real estate prices urge gentrification, to move those people out of desirable real estate. At other times Whites cluster in exclusively White areas. Appalachian folk tend towards country music, NASCAR, and rural/suburban areas noted for their lack of non-Whites. Mid-Atlantic Quakers and Post Puritan-Progressives enjoy classical music, jazz and the blues (which Blacks have fled from in panic due to White popularity), 80's music, gentrified urban settings and "hip-trendy" outposts like Asheville NC or Austin TX that are nearly exclusively White. [The Cavaliers of Virginia of course are long dead and gone, culturally.] Even the most enthusiastic proponent in Hollywood of "magical Blackness" (that Spike Lee among others complain about) do their utmost to live in lily-White areas: Malibu, Santa Monica, Brentwood, etc. Indeed, at no time has all of White America been so exclusively White, and culturally as well as physically removed from Blacks and Hispanics. You won't find any Whites not even those most enthusiastic about illegal immigration and "the end of Whiteness" watching Sabado Gigante on Univision.

So fleeing will continue, until there is nowhere to flee to, by average Whites. Upper class, more wealthy Whites have already fled to exclusive White urban zones, such as Malibu or NYC's Upper East Side. But flight is not sustainable forever, and the other notable characteristic of the Backwoods folk is their propensity to fight, often to the bitter end, when cornered and their conception of "natural liberty" is infringed upon. Indeed, as the cultural grouping of Backwoods grows, at the expense of the Mid-Atlantic and Puritan-Progressive groupings, the tendency to fight to "protect your liberty" is only going to get stronger, and tinged with pure racial identification.

Being a Puritan-Progressive, or Mid-Atlantic utopianist, takes money and security. Without money to isolate one's self from non-Whites (and those outside your cultural grouping as well) it cannot be sustained. Without physical safety, a strong and efficient police force that crushes any attempt to victimize the White Puritan-Progressive or the Mid-Atlantic Utopian elites, that cultural grouping cannot be sustained. You cannot believe in original racial sin (Whites) and redemption (making Whites minorities in their own countries to get rid of those Backwoodsmen to whom all sin accrues) during a Home Invasion. Or your kid getting beat up at school due to "Whiteness" or any myriad other violent or hostile encounters with non-Whites asserting physical dominance, control, and so on. It is easy to decry the "stupid racism of Hillbillies" in Malibu gated communities and mansions. Much harder to do it when your neighborhood is over-run with MS-13 or the Zetas, and your kids get beat up every day. Or your household income takes massive hits just for private school to keep your kids from a daily beating. Or rising fuel costs force you into daily and bitterly resented contact with hostile non-Whites.

The ascendancy of the Puritan-Progressive and Mid-Atlantic utopian ideals, of pre-destined damned and saved, and magical goodness of non-Whites, depended on constantly rising incomes to produce enough economic margin to grow and convert Whites to that cultural grouping. A sustained downward spiral pushes Whites to nationalism, high rates of physical mobility, intense personal loyalty to a few leaders, and a desire to fight along clan/family/tribal basis for "natural liberty" i.e. the ideal of being left alone, government being merely a means for others, (in this case non-Whites) to oppress ordinary people. Call this the Hillbilly way. The Hillbilly Way tends to grow (a lot) when times turn hard, for a good long spell. [It was the political genius of FDR to pull Hillbillies his way, by deporting every Mexican he could, and preventing Blacks from unionizing or even voting in the same Democratic Primary as Whites, until 1944.]

Cue the spoils fights. There will be a "stuck group" that will not be able to flee to Whitopia, and indeed the Puritan-Progressive and Mid Atlantic Utopianists (motivated by sheer hatred of "the Hillbilly Way" and Hillbillies) have done their best to encourage a "drowning of Whiteness" (and hated cultural rivals) by importing masses of non-Whites, both Mexican illegal aliens, and various non-White refugees, and settling them in places like Idaho, or Wisconsin, or Minnesota, or Maine. Whitopia is no longer so White. Setting up the fight part of flight or fight.

Will an aging White population tax itself basically out of existence, to educate and provide welfare for non-Whites who are as a matter of course, both innately hostile to them and replacing them totally? The answer is no. Nor will a non-White population tax itself, or even devote a smidgen of public funds, to support aging Whites who they both despise and know they will replace. This extends of course to the current budget struggle in California, where Jerry Brown is hinting he'll dump State workers benefits and salaries, already agreed upon, to spend the money on Hispanics: health care, education, and welfare. Even with massive tax increases, the only way to keep spending mountains of money on the California Hispanic population is by gutting the money spent on mostly White state and local government workers.

At its possible worst, this sets the stage for what Igor Panarin predicted: civil war and secession over spoils and public spending. Widely dismissed as naïve and stupid at the time, Panarin (not a fringe figure, rather a respected dean of Russia's academy for diplomats) seems prophetic. While the exact breakdown of a US split and dissolution might be argued, it cannot be dismissed out of hand. Simply because there is no example, in all of human history, of a democratic republic being multi-racial and multicultural. At best, brutal dictators who rule with the help of a favored group, by mercilessly hounding the other out-groups, provide the stability of the grave. Tito, Stalin, Mithridates, Caesar Augustus, Ghengis Khan, all come to mind. Human beings simply are not built to trust and trade resources fairly and freely across racial lines in a republic (rights of minorities and dissenters respected) and democracy (majority rule). It has never ever happened in all of human history and culture, which is considerable. Because, quite likely, the kin-based nature of human evolution has pre-disposed us to cooperate on racial/cultural lines: people who reasonably look, act, sound, and otherwise resemble distant cousins. We certainly do have many examples, as Amy Chua's "World on Fire" show, of democratic majorities constantly victimizing minorities. The difference of course is that in the US, the minorities (Whites) are likely to fight back.

Here is what the man had to say (the map at the top of the post is from the WSJ story):

He based the forecast on classified data supplied to him by FAPSI analysts, he says. He predicts that economic, financial and demographic trends will provoke a political and social crisis in the U.S. When the going gets tough, he says, wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and effectively secede from the union. Social unrest up to and including a civil war will follow. The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, and foreign powers will move in.

Yes, he sounds at least half-way accurate. Financial, demographic, and economic crisis have all hit the US at the same time. Indeed the crisis are largely driven by demographic trends. Replacing Whites with non-Whites would be problematic (based on human nature) if the replacers were wealthier than Whites. Given that they are in fact much poorer and remain so, this makes conflict of some sort (hopefully only political) inevitable.

Of course, violent secession is not set in stone. But neither is it an unlikely fantasy. Fleeing Whites who were in effect ethnically cleansed out of California, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, and Florida are unlikely to be willing to transfer funds from wealthier White states such as Idaho, or South Dakota, to Texas and the rest of the "Mexico Norte" states. Money to be spent on the very people who ethnically cleansed them out of their homes in the first place. Nor is there any way to construct a "grand bargain" -- Hispanics (mostly all Mexicans) spending money to care for an aging White population in exchange for taxes spent to educate poor Mexicans and provide welfare. First, there will not be enough money to go around, the average income gap per household is about $16,000 of White vs. Hispanic in 2009 dollars according to the US Census Bureau. There has been no narrowing the gap over the last twenty years, instead it has only increased. And socially, Hispanics have had growing maladaptive behaviors to increase income: growing not decreasing levels of illegitimacy, growing not decreasing levels of drop out rates, growing not decreasing levels of Spanish only language skills. Meanwhile the burden of providing health, education, and welfare of a desperately poor population of illegal aliens and one only slightly less desperately poor (the children of illegal aliens and every descendant afterwards) increases exponentially.

There would be barely enough money to provide for White social security and other retirement issues (health care). There is without question not enough money to provide for the "Mexicanization" of much of the United States. The health care, education, and welfare needs are so great that even if no money was spent at all on elderly Whites, there would not be enough to go around. Poor people, it seems, cost a lot.

Which means conflict. This conflict can be done by more peaceful means, through political action that makes decisions stick, by forcing those without means and power to fight back to accept a fait-accompli (basically a re-run of the Trail of Tears, some form of mass deportations of the out-group), or a process that spirals out of control into violence. Given the entrenched interests that benefit from Mexicanization of America, and the sheer hatred of "Hillbillies" by Progressive-Puritans and Mid Atlantic Idealists, a good bet is on the latter. Of course, any such process is likely 15 to 25 years out, but it is highly likely at some point. A good many political analysts predicted the Civil War by 1835, and as note by Panarin, the collapse of the USSR by the 1970's. America could no more remain half-slave and half-free as it can half-Mexican-dominated and half-not-Mexican-dominated. The cultural, economic, political, and mass population conflicts in each case make some sort of total loser/total winner outcome, by whatever means, almost inevitable.

In this case, it is worth noting that the US military already remains in the views of some, dangerously isolated and quite angry at much of Establishment America. This story from Politico touches on the divide between "peacetime America" and the Wartime Military. Columbia Students shouted "racist" at a wounded, wheel-chair bound vet who spoke out for ROTC on campus, while others jeered and laughed at his injuries. Meanwhile US Defense Secretary Robert Gates worries:

A decade of constant conflict has trained a junior officer corps with exceptional leadership skills, he told the cadets, but the Army may find it difficult in the future to find inspiring work to retain its rising commanders as it fights for the money to keep large, heavy combat units in the field.

“Men and women in the prime of their professional lives, who may have been responsible for the lives of scores or hundreds of troops, or millions of dollars in assistance, or engaging or reconciling warring tribes, may find themselves in a cube all day re-formatting PowerPoint slides, preparing quarterly training briefs, or assigned an ever-expanding array of clerical duties,” Mr. Gates said. “The consequences of this terrify me.”

Hmmm … let me see now. An officer corps, almost exclusively White, Southern/Western, conservative, mirrored fairly completely down to the lowest detail of enlisted men? A feckless, and clueless national leadership intent on massively changing the way of life of pretty much everyone in the country that is also innately hostile to the Military itself? Mixed with an economic crisis, fiscal crisis, and political crisis all tracing their origins to what amounts to complete demographic replacement of Whites by Mexicans in the US, all without any vote or constitutional amendment? Where have I seen anything like this before? Add to this the de-industrialization of the North and North East, and growing move of what little manufacturing there is to Southern and Western states, and things look different than in 1860.

Naturally, and often fortunately, the future does not move in straight lines. Something is endurable, until it becomes un-endurable. Various agitators are effective, or not. Crisis that should have been foreseen, sneak up on everyone while distraction over piddling events reigns. Human error or courage, stupidity or wisdom, change events from a certainty to a new course. Sometimes even natural disasters can take a hand in shaping history. The Kamikaze originally referred to the near-miraculous typhoon that sunk the Mongol Invasion fleet that would have easily conquered Japan. The Monguls were near invincible. Save for water.

So it is possible, and hopeful, that Mexican immigration into this country slows dramatically, and is even reversed. That sudden cutbacks in welfare spending provoke a soul-searching and wrenching amount of changes in Hispanic behavior, with norms of marriage before children, educational striving, and low crime being a sudden radical shift. Anything can happen. Perhaps an early encounter, with the "aging Anglo population" getting its way with fiscal policy, can create a rapid desire for assimilation by the coming Mexican majority.

The smart bet based on Human History, however, says greed and stupidity will preclude any rational attempt to settle a division of resources and control, short of violence and brutal coercion, and America will indeed slide into the conflict envisioned by Igor Panarin. Not of course, right away. But inevitably, as the call of the trumpets at Shiloh and Bull Run and Gettysburg were heard even in 1835, so the siren call of war and conflict is being heard already. Driven by fundamental conflicts.

It is all over for Anglos in Texas. Also California, Arizona, Florida, and probably Illinois. Whites are now the functional minority, in the US. While being the target of non-Whites for resource extraction, the White to non-White gap in income being considerable and growing. Amy Chua's model of "market dominant minorities" will probably hold for Bill Gates kids, and Warren Buffett's, and perhaps even Mitt Romney's kids. But for the great rest of the average White guy, flight will soon turn into fight. Because life as basically a third class citizen in Mexico Norte is worth fighting to avoid, everything else notwithstanding. With conveniently, a great deal of military men who got battlefield training (Lee and the other Southern Commanders all had extensive experience in the Mexican-American War, the Union Officer Corps till Grant and Sherman were time-serving non-entities who had no real combat/leadership experience) and find little else to interest them. While a great deal of the current New England/Mid Atlantic elite holds them in mutual contempt and disgust.

Ultimately, a non-White America will resemble Mexico, only slightly better off. The same levels of corruption, violence, and government services will prevail. With an added feature of ethnically/racially driven violence and government discrimination. Good government, security, prosperity, all cost money. They can only be achieved, history shows us, with an ethnically and culturally unitary, large and dominant middling class that controls the government and directs its spending and aims for its own ends. There is a reason the Philippines and places like it are chaotic, violent, and poor. Despite the ability to punish and extract at times resources from Chua's "Market Dominant Minorities."

In any conflict, moreover, the initiative remains with a more unified, disciplined, experienced, and smarter opponent. Sheer numbers can at times overwhelm, but at other times provide only carnage and cannon fodder. Speed, mobility, surprise, and most critical of all, discipline under chaos tend to produce the most winners, in politics and in war. Conflict of some sort is coming, that much is certain. You cannot have population replacement, a welfare state, and legalized racial caste systems (Whites on bottom) and not have conflict in some form. Let us hope and pray the basic resource division: spend on older Whites or younger Hispanics, is settled short of violence with conclusive finality, through political means, avoids a break-up of the US, and restores a racial unity and peacefulness to America.

21 comments:

Over for Anglos--not quite. But the days of a large welfare state are clearly numbered. Mexicans are not black. Repeat that phrase a few times until it sinks in. We tend to lump all NAMs together without thinking about the subtle differences between NAM groups. Mexicans actually have a lot in common with the working class (hillbilly) whites. My white grandfather shoveled coal for a living before he became an electrician. My white uncles were bricklayers and tin-benders. We will be returning to a national economy with a lot of menial labor and a lower standard of living. We look at Mexico today and see that whiter Mexicans tend to live a very nice upper middle class life, while Mexicans who are more black or Amerindian tend to be dirt poor. This is our future as well, but how will we get there? Even as whites become a minority in the USA they still own most of the wealth, guns, and arable land. As Whiskey predicts conflict is inevitable, but whom will the whites be fighting? Not the NAMs. When cornered whites will fight other whites. As the economic situation becomes more serious a great squeezing of the white middle class will take place. The first shots will be fired in anger at people who have come to take houses, and family farms for back taxes. In light of the foreclosure crisis it is possible that these first shots have already been fired and we paid no heed. As the crisis unfolds leaders will emerge to resist the great squeeze and some desperate whites will follow those leaders. Will this lead to secession and civil war or a period of white insurgency against the still predominately white govt.? The good news is that FICA, FUTA, workman's comp, and all the other punitive taxation of labor are just about over. These taxes never made much sense, and they just won't work in an economy where most people are menial laborers. The bad news is that the republic in done for. Good news if you are white is that your descendants will still most likely own everything 50 years from now. The more interesting question is what happens to all the women and children as the great squeeze takes place. After all--my coal shoveling grandpa still managed to raise an intact family. The other topic that Whiskey blogs about, the collapse of monogamy, may be more significant than the NAM invasion. The NAM invasion can only turn the US into Mexico or Brazil and whites have it pretty good in Mexico and Brazil. The collapse of monogamy can turn the US into Zimbabwe.

I can tell you in the Northeast whites are fleeing public education in droves. The only students left in public schools are minorities and underachievers. The private schools are turning students away. We have 7 or 8 very expensive private schools in our area. When my high school senior son applied to an expensive all boys school 4 years ago the school rejected 50 applicants. This year my other son applied to the same school and 120 students were rejected. The number of applicants rises every year. The size of the student body stays the same. If the public schools were doing their job the parents would see no need to spend $50,000 to give their white son a private high school education.

"Let us hope and pray the basic resource division: spend on older Whites or younger Hispanics, is settled short of violence with conclusive finality, through political means, avoids a break-up of the US, and restores a racial unity and peacefulness to America."

My feeling is that 'a break-up of the US' is the *best* hope for racial unity and peacefulness.

"Albion's Seed" is very interesting- large portions can be read for free on Amazon. Political conflict in the US is very much a power struggle between these historical English groups and their later-arriving allies. People all across the political spectrum from communists to white nationalists like to talk about "white people" but there is no such homogenous group.

Whiskey, may I please ask which micro neighborhood here in Los Angeles you live in?

Because What I see here is very different than what you see. I see large numbers of whites in their 30's settling in areas that are NOT all white.

Let me be clear, these are middle aged people that grew up in all white neighborhoods like Malibu, Westlake Village, Lake Sherwood, etc who have decided that life in the all white neighborhoods is too boring and who have instead decided to settle in Venice.

Whiskey how much time have you spent on Abbott Kinney recently? It is filled with whites who can afford to live anywhere that they want who have chosen to live in Venice, even thought the population of Venice is very mixed.

Whiskey I think the massive decline in crime in some "mixed" areas of LA like Venice has led many whites to consider it as a home, whites who never would have considered it in the past.

So, yes in some places in America some whites are moving to exurban whiteopias. However it seems that in some other places in America, like DC, NYC, LA, Chicago whites who grew up in all white neighborhoods are moving in very large numbers to mixed neighborhoods.

I don't think this is discussed much here in the paleo - o - sphere because almost by definition, a paleo conservative is someone who IF HE CAN AFFORD IT will always choose an all white neighborhood over a neighborhood that has some nams living in it - so stories about large numbers of whites actually moving TO mixed neighborhoods just don't resonate to the people who post here.

That being said, I would like you to tell us what neighborhood you live in so that i can get a sense for where you are coming from

I am not familiar with Venice, Ca, but it seems like a cool place to live. "Venice is a district on the Westside of Los Angeles, California, United States. It is known for its canals, beaches and circus-like Ocean Front Walk, ."

Could this be an example of gentrification taking place? Whites have been moving back into the District of Columbia, and have been gentrifying trendy parts of several American cities. This tends to slowly inflate real estate prices and force lower income people out. I tend to agree with the premise that whites do not fear Hispanics as much as they tend to fear blacks. Perhaps this is because I spent a lot of time in New Mexico as a boy... If true this lack of fear and resentment means that the huge influx of hispanics will continue unabated. This migration pattern will not be resisted any more than the "great migration" of southern blacks to Detroit was resisted back in 1950. There will be fiscal and cultural consequences.

Agree with your overall conclusions, but maybe not so much with the timing. Birth rates in Latin America have tanked lately, so ten years from now there simply won't be that big a base from which to draw illegal immigrants. From what I understand, the same is true among Hispanics stateside.

However, this is still a game of last man standing. If white women produced even FEWER kids than Hispanics, the future you envision will still become a reality.

I live in Irvine but am familiar with Venice/Abbot Kinney. Its like New Orleans Uptown pre-Katrina: gentrifying as you say due to lower crime rates. It is desirable: better air quality, close to the beach, etc.

HOWEVER, it has massive problems. Lots of homeless, RVs spewing sewage on the streets, gangs (particularly closer to Lincoln Blvd you get), and so on. The Beach is a combat zone at night, but yeah Abbot Kinney is hipster doofus central (complete with gourmet food truck invasion).

"I can tell you in the Northeast whites are fleeing public education in droves."

In my area this has definitely been a noticeable trend, even though it's close to DC and thus affluent regardless of the nationwide economy. There are a number of "Friends" schools, along with elite Catholic schools & non-denominational private institutions dating from the 19th Century. Although some of the fancy SWPL preschools are struggling, private middle and high schools are still popular, and probably still raising huge sums from alumni. My own private high school raised record amounts of money while I attended (circa 2000). Class sizes went up, and our old middle school was demolished to make way for a larger building. And yet this still wasn't enough to keep up with demand. Admission became even more competitive (rising tuition did not deter applicants), and so did admission to the ivies for anyone lucky enough to get in.

More importantly, from a demographic standpoint, the racial makeup of the class was barely altered. The school remained perhaps 75-80% white, and perhaps 20% "model minority" (Indian and East Asian). IIRC we had exactly one Hispanic student the four years I was there, and about 10 blacks per graduting class. Right next to our school was a poor Black public high school, whose students sometimes attacked my classmates when they could get away with it. In other words, the two schools were basically a microcosm of the two-tier educational system developing in this country.

Unfortunately, I do not see this trend reversing itself. There will always be a core of gentrified whites who can escape to the private & religious schools, plus some whites whose school districts function tolerably well due to low levels of NAM students. Most public schools on the coasts and in the Southwest, however, will devolve into Disciplinary Boot-meets-Daycare within 5-10 years. To see what will happen to the shrinking White student bodies, take a look at the story below.

http://mydaughtersassault.blogspot.com/

(Some interesting comments, BTW, from the White posters on that blog. Since 2008 more & more Whites are mentioning unpleasant truths on the net, if not in person).

tacticalchrstn said..."But the days of a large welfare state are clearly numbered."

I agree.There is a common but hugely incorrect belief that Latinos are economically liberal. In reality nothing can be further from the truth. Latinos and also Blacks only support social welfare programs because Whitey is picking up the tab.

take a look at the countries of the world ordered by tax revenue as percentage of GDPand you'll notice that African and Latin American countries have some of the lowest tax rates in the world.low taxes == low social welfare

There you have it folks, smoking gun evidence, that Blacks and Latinos don't want to pay taxes to support social welfare. Only a white society can support it. Therefore once whites are no longer the majority social welfare will collapse in the USA.

Oddly enough one of the Left's most cherished institutions, social welfare, will collapse primarily because of an action they themselves supported, open borders and race replacement of thw white race.

You can't possibly take that map seriously, Whiskey. I mean, Russia taking Alaska? With what? China taking the western seaboard? How? More likely Mexico would do that, if they were interested.

As far as the Texas report goes, we should wait a bit to see the data hashed out before running around screaming. The numbers were released in a manner to maximize public attention. For what purpose I'm not sure. They rely on some questionable assumptions, such as continued immigration from countries that won't continue to export people for long. There's also the sensationalism of public school attendance, when we have a lot of private schools. Another thing is the amount of immigration from other states is on the increase, and that offsets Hispanic entries.

Aside from numbers, yes, Dorothy, Texas Hispanics are different from their "cousins" in California. They intermix far more readily and have a greater cultural stake in the Texas identity. They're also more European by ancestry. I'm sure you all know about Eva Longoria going on George Lopez and finding out she's 87% Euro. Well, she's not much different than about 60% of the Mexicans you'll find in South Texas. In fact, the her home congressional district just tossed Solomon Ortiz in favor the GOP candidate. The dude was a fixture, kind of like a Mexican Charlie Rangel. So there is some ideological and racial give in this situation.

None of this is to say everything's peachy. We should close the border and enforce our laws, but we don't need to run around freaking out.

YR said... "It is the nature of white man to flee rather than fight. We are descended from those who fled furthest from africa"

It was not that long ago where a 2 income household GUARANTEED a sufficient income level to buy a house in a safe neighborhood. (translation: away from NAM's) Unless you were poor white trash, you had the means to insulate yourself.

If you go back to the 1980's it was common for Hollywood to produce cheesy dysotopian sci fi movies where in the future the elites live a privilege lifestyle free of social ills. The rest unfortunately live in a hell hole. Naturally there is an "admission fee" to enter this semi-utopian city and if you couldn't afford to pay then too bad! Well folks it seems these movies have unfortunately predicted the future rather acurrately.

Unless God gifted you with a brain 1 stanadrd deviation higher than the mean IQ, (16% of the population) thereby allowing you to secure a high paying job so you can buy that $500,000 house because that's how much it's going to cost to distance yourself from Blacks and Latinos unfortunately you're going to get screwed.

It is not a happy coincidence that the rise of the angry white male as a political force is happening at a time when being middle class no longer shields you from the problems of diversity / multi-culturalism: crime, failing schools, ghetto behavior.

Polichinello is right about the map, which I have seen before on several websites. The regional divisions prove that this Russian professor is ignorant of US society. He also knows little about foreign relations. Modern nation-states (even China) lack the logistical capabilities and/or will to colonize the United States. A more plausible future will involve not conquests by nation-states but "soft" quasi-invasions by migrant colonists. Think "Camp of the Saints" with America as the main target instead of Europe. Along with street violence from domestic minority populations, also foretold in "Camp of the Saints".

Geographic divisions could potentially be as follows:

-California, Texas, and the Southwest predominantly Central American

-Pockets of strong Hispanic influence in the Southeast and midatlantic

-Blacks confined to the historical "Black Belt" in the South, and the "Rust Belt" to the North

-Whites retreating to "Whitopias" in the midwest and northwest

If the Republic ends anytime soon it won't be a group of resurgent superpowers abroad carving the US up like a pie. Rather, nonstate domestic and foreign interests will cause Federal authority to crumble. Europe, China, Japan, and the Mideast will probably be convulsed by the same forces. This will leave them unable to intervene. Whether through colonial military operations or legal unification with American regions.